Authority: Delhi High Court
Order Date: 03.07.2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Food Corporation of India & Ors. (Appellants) vs. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (C & R) & Ors. (Respondents).
- Proceedings: Appeal FMA 388 of 2026 with CAN 1 of 2025 and CAN 3 of 2025 filed by the appellants challenging an order dated 25 February 2025 passed by a Single Bench of this Court.
- Background: The Single Bench had, based on the appellants' submissions, permitted them to seek payment of the PF demand in easy installments, citing their lack of financial soundness. The Bench also held that the appeal provision under Section 7(I) of the Employees' Provident Fund (EPF) Act was beyond the limitation period and could not be entertained, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada & Ors. Vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) 19 SCC 681.
- Counsel Representation: Senior Advocate Ritzu Ghoshal, Kamal Kumar Chattopadhyay, A. Chakraborty for the appellants; S.C. Prasad, Avijit Tewary for the PF Authorities; Barnamoy Basak for the respondent.
- Key Observations: Senior counsel for the appellants asserted that they had no instructions to make the submission before the Single Bench on the said date. The Court noted that the proper remedy would have been to file an application before the Single Bench seeking withdrawal of the installment offer, supported by appropriate reasons and documents, which was not done.
Final Outcome
- The Court held that the statutory limitation period for appeal under Section 7(I) of the EPF Act has expired, and in line with the Supreme Court dicta, the order of the Single Bench stands without interference.
- Consequently, FMA 388 of 2026 is dismissed, and all connected pending applications are also dismissed.
- Any interim order, if existent, is vacated.
- No order as to costs is made.
- All parties are directed to act on the server copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the Court.
Topics: EPF Regulation, Court Decision